In the case of many of the big-name "blackouts" from sites like Wikipedia, Google, or Reddit, I was not impressed with the follow-through used. Google turned their logo black. Wikipedia's blackout was only for the English site and easily overridden with (or due to lack of) javascript. Reddit only did it for half of the day.

IMO those are examples of half-hearted protests. If you're going to protest something you should first come up with an effective form of protest and then commit to follow through with the protest.

This I understand, as I too was looking for a bit more - all in - carnage.

In the case of many of the big-name "blackouts" from sites like Wikipedia, Google, or Reddit, I was not impressed with the follow-through used. Google turned their logo black. Wikipedia's blackout was only for the English site and easily overridden with (or due to lack of) javascript. Reddit only did it for half of the day.

IMO those are examples of half-hearted protests. If you're going to protest something you should first come up with an effective form of protest and then commit to follow through with the protest.

This I understand, as I too was looking for a bit more - all in - carnage.

Carnage? That's what Anonymous is for~!

But no... you're right. I was hoping for a bit more. Google just petered out. Their effort was just f*****g lame.

NSFW Google's excuse...

But what can you do when you've got investor cocks rammed down your throat? Kind of hard to "fuck profit" for the greater good/sanity when you're busy gobbling...

I seem to remember there being "four boxes" without even the coffin ... Got it - y'all forgot Jury Box.

The four boxes of liberty is a meme that proposes: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." It is often quoted by conservative groups that oppose gun control."

I was rather frustrated that they didn't even make an effort to make it easier for those using their Blogger service to opt in to blacking out their blogs. They couldn't add a blackout option to their control panel to make it easy? I don't think I was asking too much from a company that voiced opposition to SOPA and had the means to do this.

I was rather angry that I had to go through the trouble to code a special template to do it. I shouldn't have had to do that.

However, I was amused by this

Someone released a tiny little piece of javascript code that bloggers could add to their existing template that would redirect their visitors to my template demo page, rather than having to apply the actual template itself.

I don't think I was asking too much from a company that voiced opposition to SOPA and had the means to do this.

I get the distinct impression "word" probably got passed back to the Big Players that Uncle Sam would greatly appreciate it if they downplayed the thing since the Legislature had already made what they no doubt felt was a conciliatory gesture by taking the bills off the table. Temporarily.

Google has already demonstrated a certain willingness to go along with government "requests" while publicly wringing their hands and protesting there's nothing they can do since "the law is the law."

That argument worked for Google over their accommodations with China. And without them getting too big a black eye over it. So why not use the same argument here, where there's nothing anyone could point at, to show this might (and likely did) happen?

I thought it was interesting that when China started insisting on their bamboo curtain the US government was very quiet about it. And what little complaint there was, was made in a very mild and restrained manner.

I guess those who write the laws have a deeper brotherhood which transcends any political and ideological differences they have. Because, let's face it, the law is the law. And police are police. And to someone with a police state mindset, a violation of one law is no different than a violation of any other.

And that doesn't change just because the flag that's being flown is different.

I seem to remember there being "four boxes" without even the coffin ... Got it - y'all forgot Jury Box.

The four boxes of liberty is a meme that proposes: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." It is often quoted by conservative groups that oppose gun control."

I get the distinct impression "word" probably got passed back to the Big Players that Uncle Sam would greatly appreciate it if they downplayed the thing since the Legislature had already made what they no doubt felt was a conciliatory gesture by taking the bills off the table. Temporarily.

That's the part that irks me. They'll try to ramrod it down some other way. Probably in an idiotic bill that makes it illegal to not be on Prozac or some other anti-psychotic. "I'm out of Soma... Can I get one from you?"

Did a bit of research here... Looks like Australians have already had most of their guns confiscated...

I wonder what society would be like if it were mandatory to carry a weapon... .380 autos for everyone. I bet muggings, assaults, and other violent crimes would just about disappear. Like who wants to try and rob a store when you know that everyone in there has a gun?

I suppose that you'd need to have a "gun check" at bars though. Guns & booze don't really mix very well.

(FYI - I'm just blathering nonsense there -- please don't anyone take me too seriously... But I am curious to know what it would be like...)

There are actually municipalities in the US that require gun ownership now. I don't think there have been studies as to what effect that has had on crime, though.

I remember hearing about that back when a few of them were just starting. IIRC early results were good ... But that doesn't guarantee a positive long term. I think a lot of might depend on people focusing on getting along (like proper adults)...instead of trying to represent (like some street punk).

How do we feel about slowing down SOPA but we mostly missed the boat on ACTA?

Horrible...

ACTA was written in secret with a few leaks, and signed last year by some traitors -- Canada, Australia, US, UK, South Korea (I think there are a few others -- not 100% sure here and too lazy to look it up right now) -- and being... oh god... what does it matter. Please just nuke the whole planet now. Why the slow descent into madness? Let's just get it over with...

Please just nuke the whole planet now. Why the slow descent into madness? Let's just get it over with...

Damnit man! Not until December! We can't be jumping the gun .... If we blow the planet too early the roaches won't be ready to sign the new lease ... And god knows who'll try to take over then (probably another bunch of stupid monkeys...).

About a month ago, we wrote about some comments by Congressional staffer Stephanie Moore, the "Democrat's chief counsel on the House Judiciary Committee," in which she still couldn't come to grips with the fact that the public rose up against SOPA -- insisting that it must have been some nefarious "misinformation" campaign. We went through, in a fair amount of detail, how the misinformation was coming from her. It appears that Moore has decided to go even further down this path and express her general distaste for the public. During a panel discussion at the American Constitution Society's 2012 National Convention, covered by BNA, Moore was a panelist and apparently decided to totally mock the public and make the ridiculous claim that the failure to pass SOPA puts the internet at risk:

Quote

“Netizens poisoned the well, and as a result the reliability of the internet is at risk,” Moore said

Think about that for a second. That entire sentence is so incredibly insulting. Millions of people spoke out against bad legislation. The public spoke out, and Moore is so against the basic concept of democracy that she has to claim that millions of people expressing their political opinion is "poisoning the well." And how in the hell is "the reliability of the internet at risk" because Congress failed to pass a horrifically bad piece of legislation aimed at censoring sites one industry didn't like? Please.

The report goes on to a bunch of additional insulting comments from Moore towards the public, including the claim that "We don't know what the numbers mean," regarding the number of people who contacted Congress on January 18th. Here, I'll help you out: it means that a very large segment of the American population realized you were trying to push through a bad bill as a favor to some big Hollywood donors, and they didn't like it. What was so hard to understand about that?...